Read 2026-10-04
redis/redis: technical due diligence, read from its repository
What Borehole read in redis/redis's code and history at 20bb2cf: its licence, security advisories, releases, review practice, tests, dependencies and operations. Every finding cites the file and line it rests on. The full report also covers the team and asks the questions the code cannot answer.
| Dimension | Rating |
|---|---|
| Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance | strong |
| Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity | strong |
| Product & Engineering Maturity | strong |
| Security & Reliability Posture | adequate |
| Observability & Operations | adequate |
| Fit with the Acquirer | not assessable |
What the repository says
- Releases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
LICENSE.txt:1: The licence is a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0COPYING: Relicensed: BSD-3-Clause → a choice of RSALv2 or SSPL-1.0 (2024-03-20) → a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0 (2025-05-01)
Architecture & Codebase — including AI provenance
strongsrc/module.c is 16,118 lines, 123× this codebase's median file
adequateThe median source file here is 131 lines. 57 files exceed 1,310 lines, the largest being 16,118. Size is not a defect on its own — some problems genuinely live in one place — but these are where merge conflicts, review fatigue and single-owner knowledge concentrate, and they are the first thing that slows an inheriting engineer down.
src/module.c:1 — 16,118 lines (123× median) |
src/redis-cli.c:1 — 11,562 lines (88× median) |
src/server.c:1 — 8,616 lines (65× median) |
deps/xxhash/xxhash.h:1 — 7,489 lines (57× median) |
src/t_hash.c:1 — 6,911 lines (52× median) |
Engineering Process & SDLC Maturity
strongNo finding.
Product & Engineering Maturity
strongReleases are cut from another branch than the one surveyed
adequateThe newest release, 8.10.2, is not on the branch this survey read; the newest release on it is v1.3.12. The shipped product may differ from what this report describes. Survey the release branch too.
| tag 8.10.2 |
Security & Reliability Posture
adequateThe build runs third-party code it does not pin
adequate8 third-party CI actions are referenced by a tag or branch rather than a commit, so they run whatever that tag points to on the day. Tags have been moved to malicious commits in real supply-chain attacks, and a piped script is whatever the server returns that minute. Pinning to a commit is the fix, and it is small.
.github/workflows/daily.yml:1150 — action pinned by tag |
.github/workflows/daily.yml:1186 — action pinned by tag |
The licence is a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0
adequateLICENSE.txt grants a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0: open source; offering it over a network counts as distributing it, so a hosted product's changes must be published. The reading comes from the licence's own title and clauses. Whether the terms fit the buyer's intended use, and whether any paid licence transfers with the code, is a question for counsel and the licensor.
LICENSE.txt:1 — 1399 lines, LicenseRef-RSALv2 OR SSPL-1.0 OR AGPL-3.0 |
Relicensed: BSD-3-Clause → a choice of RSALv2 or SSPL-1.0 (2024-03-20) → a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0 (2025-05-01)
adequateThe root licence changed 2 time(s). The latest terms restrict what users, hosts or a buyer may do in ways the earlier ones did not. Code taken under the old terms stays under them, so both matter in diligence.
COPYING — BSD-3-Clause from 2009-03-22 |
COPYING — a choice of RSALv2 or SSPL-1.0 from 2024-03-20 |
LICENSE.txt — a choice of RSALv2, SSPL-1.0 or AGPL-3.0 from 2025-05-01 |
30 advisories against this project in the last 24 months, 18 high or critical
adequateThe newest was published on 2026-09-27. A project that publishes advisories is telling its users about its fixes, and the count and pace say how much security work it carries. The record is incomplete: NVD: 50 records name redis with nothing tying them to this repository (CVE-2013-0180, CVE-2016-10639, CVE-2016-10672, …).
| 2026-09-27: CVE-2026-100860 (moderate): heym before 0.0.105 does not act on the result of the credential authorization lookup in the Redis workflow node (backend/app/services/node_execution/nodes/redi |
| 2026-09-24: CVE-2026-97057 (high): redis-parser through 3.0.0 fails to validate the multi-bulk length value in RESP protocol parsing, allowing attackers to trigger an uncaught RangeError by suppl |
| 2026-09-17: CVE-2026-92925 (high): A flaw was found in Redis community. The cluster bus packet parser, responsible for handling PING, PONG, and MEET packets, fails to properly validate string-car |
| 2026-09-17: CVE-2026-93435 (high): redis-parser through 3.0.0 contains a denial of service vulnerability in the RESP protocol parser that allows malicious Redis endpoints to crash the client proc |
| 2026-09-16: CVE-2026-92456 (high): yshop-crm through 2.1.3 fails to enforce authorization on the saveRedisSet and getRedisSet endpoints in CrmCustomerController, allowing any authenticated back-o |
Observability & Operations
adequateNo telemetry or error reporting is wired in anywhere
adequateNone of 1,763 readable files references an instrumentation, metrics or error-reporting library. If this system is in production, nobody learns that it broke from the system itself — they learn it from a customer. That is a reliability finding before it is an observability one.
| searched 1,763 tracked text files for 16 known instrumentation libraries; manifests for metrics, tracing and error-reporting families; locked dependencies for the packages that emit; 0 matched |
No structured logging library is in use
adequateNothing references a structured logging library. Logs that are written to be read by a person are not searchable by a machine, which means incident response here is proportional to how well someone remembers the codebase rather than to what the tooling can find.
| C source is not searched: C programs log through printf-style calls unless they take a library, and none of the 10 searched for is referenced |
One request cannot be followed through the logs
adequateNothing in the service carries a request or correlation id, and there is no tracing. When a customer reports a failure, the log lines that belong to their request cannot be picked out from everyone else's.
| no request id, correlation id or tracing found |
No error reporter is wired in
adequateNothing in the service initialises an error reporter (Sentry, Rollbar, Bugsnag, Honeybadger or an APM agent). An exception in production reaches a person only if someone is reading the logs, which usually means a customer reports it first.
| no error reporter initialised |
Fit with the Acquirer
not assessableNot rated: structurally not assessable from a repository.
Read more, or read your own
The full report on redis/redis: every dimension, the questions for the room, and the audit log.
Survey a repository: free on public repositories. Private code is read on your own machine by a collector whose source you can read first.